Living Proof: the Isaac Newton Institute podcast · Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences

#50 Why should we bother communicating INI research? An interview with Rachel Thomas and Marianne Freiberger

·32 min·3 clips

David Spiegelhalter says you can't expect to be trusted—you can only act in a trustworthy way when communicating science.

This episode features host Dan Aspel in conversation with Rachel Thomas and Marianne Freiberger, editors of PLUS magazine, which partners with the Isaac Newton Institute (INI) to communicate mathematical research. They discuss the specific challenges and importance of translating advanced mathematics for diverse audiences, drawing from a recent INI event on public communication. The conversation centers on their practical experiences, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic while working with the Juniper Consortium modeling group. A key topic is communicating science during crises, where their work was used by SAGE and SPI-M and aimed at policymakers and a wary public, emphasizing transparency and trustworthiness over mere enthusiasm. They reference communicator David Spiegelhalter and philosopher Onora O'Neill's idea that one must "act in a trustworthy way" by citing sources and acknowledging assumptions. Another focus is making cutting-edge INI research, like programs on liquid metal batteries or hydrodynamic dispersion, accessible by connecting it to foundational concepts or real-world applications. The hosts describe their method of starting from basic principles, like explaining waves, to build a pathway toward complex topics. They acknowledge that even researchers often don't understand work outside their specialism, citing the Langlands program as a past challenge they addressed by focusing on the collaborative process of proof instead. A memorable insight is that the pressure of multiple audiences—journalists, the public, policymakers—reading the same COVID-19 documents improved the quality of the outputs. They note that a researcher's ability to communicate their passion, like Fields Medalist Manjul Bhargava's accessible lecture, is exceptionally valuable but rare. The hosts believe mathematical stories exist in almost any news headline, from Olympic velodrome design to elections, though the mathematical underpinnings often remain hidden. They argue communication is vital both for justifying public funding and for public numeracy, helping people see links between school maths and frontier research. In a utopian vision, they wish mathematics were seen as a welcoming, creative pursuit and a universal "language of rhythm and patterns" rather than a feared subject. The tone is conversational, reflective, and based on shared professional experience, with a constructive and hopeful outlook on the communicator's role. The style is educational, offering concrete strategies for explaining complex ideas. This episode would appeal to educators, science communicators, researchers interested in public engagement, or anyone curious about how abstract mathematics reaches the public sphere. Listeners seeking a highly technical discussion of specific mathematical results or a debate about scientific policy might find it less directly relevant.

As heard by us

A clear case for making advanced mathematics legible without sanding off the edges.

Rachel Thomas and Marianne Freiberger make a clear case for why the Isaac Newton Institute should explain its research, and for how to do that without flattening the maths.

Read the full review in PlayNext →

Why you'd press play

You want a thoughtful look at why advanced maths should be explained at all.

Read the full recommendation in PlayNext →

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from Living Proof: the Isaac Newton Institute podcast